Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:i vote with my wallet (Score 1) 328

By the way, your seriously deluding yourself if you think we've ever had a system of justice. We have a system of laws (such as it is). Justice is a mythical creature that only exists in theory. One person's justice is another person's injustice.

I know. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try, at least a little. The alternative, as you said yourself, is anarchy.

Justice cannot be achieved. Take the case of Michael Brown versus Officer Wilson. If Wilson isn't charged, there is a sizable contingency that will know that justice was not served. If Officer Wilson was charged, there is a sizable contingency that will know that justice was not served.

The best you can hope for is a system of laws where everyone is equal before the law. Yes, I know, this is also a pipe dream. But it is the best you can hope for. So, in absence of a justice system -- you can have a system of laws. You don't need to have anarchy.

Comment Re:Optometrist? (Score 1) 464

Don't come from 'you're a fool, and you don't understand what I need". Come from "Yes, I know that this turns your experience and training on it's head. I'm trying to do something abnormal, and I'd like to use your experience to improve on my abnormal request".

Before writing the prescription he agreed with me. What makes him an absolute evil bastard was that he lied and gave me what he wanted versus what he said he was going to do. I don't object to a professional saying I think you're wrong and here's why and not giving in. I object to an faux-professional saying Yes, I see your point. We'll do it your way and then doing whatever the hell he wants.

Comment Re:Optometrist? (Score 3, Funny) 464

Therefore, any professional opinions provided by the optometrist are going to be biased by the money involved.

This.

The second to the last optometrist that I went to insisted that I get trifocals. I insisted that I wanted a single focal point with the focal point set for the computer monitor. He huffed and puffed and finally gave me a single prescription -- with a focal point about 20 feet away. The bastard. He knew what I wanted and decided to screw me over so that I would have to come back. I didn't; I went elsewhere.

I must admit that I read his obituary with great glee.

Comment Re:i vote with my wallet (Score 1) 328

Here's the thing: if one truly believes in a system of justice and the rule of law, then one must refuse to recognize the validity of any contract that is not of equitable nature (be it equally fair or equally unfair).

You have a false premise. There are lots of laws that I disagree with -- even the current length of copyright -- but I don't go around breaking every law I disagree with just because I disagree with it. If everyone did that, it would be anarchy, not to mention, why have laws in the first place (since you're going to do whatever you damn will want anyway).

Noah has it right. Work within the system to change the law. Boycott the products that benefit the opposition. But deciding that you're both the legislative and executive branch and breaking the law is not only not legal, it is not the right approach.

By the way, your seriously deluding yourself if you think we've ever had a system of justice. We have a system of laws (such as it is). Justice is a mythical creature that only exists in theory. One person's justice is another person's injustice.

Submission + - Laws for thee but not for me.... (watchdog.org) 1

An anonymous reader writes: In a ruling handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court, the nation’s top court found that a police officer who mistakenly interprets a law and pulls someone over hasn’t violated their Fourth Amendment rights.

If a police officer reasonably believes something is against the law, they are justified in initiating a traffic stop, says the U.S. Supreme Court. The problem? According to North Carolina traffic law, only one tail light needs to be functional. That means the initial stop, justified on these grounds, would have been illegal — and so would the seizure of the cocaine found in Heien’s car

“The result is a system in which “ignorance of the law is no excuse” for citizens facing conviction, but police can use their own ignorance about the law to their advantage,” notes the legal brief on the case by a coalition of civil rights organizations, including American Civil Liberties Union and Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank.

Although this was a traffic stop, imagine this applied to computer search & seizure. Suddenly, you could be facing "reasonable belief" that you committed a crime.

I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say that this will enable a Police State.

Comment Re:Well duh - it's always been about saving money (Score 1) 420

It has nothing to do with productivity.

I was under the impression that productivity was king at a startup.

The closest I've been to an open office was a four person cube with a round table in the center. All four were working on the same project and it was the most productive environment I've been in. If you had a question, you could roll your chair back to the table, have an impromptu meeting and get right back to work.

The only problem we had were the lookie-loos that decided they could just walk into our cube and start a conversation.

Comment Re:Google doesn't have a monopoly on ANYTHING. (Score 1) 334

Laws actually effectively dictate they have to, as they have to run the business in such a way as to try to maximise the profits of their shareholders.

Actually, no. There is no law that a corporation needs to maximize profits for their shareholders. Take Tim Cook's statements regarding Apple trying to be green when a shareholder insisted that wouldn't maximize profit.

Comment Re:Google doesn't have a monopoly on ANYTHING. (Score 1) 334

What's being "shoved down member states throats" are almost all laws that the national politicians wanted, but couldn't get through locally because of popular resistance and the media eating them alive. So they push it up to the EU, it comes back a few year later, thanks to short public memory they now claim they have no choice, it's an EU mandate, and they get the laws they wanted.

I'm confused. It seems like you're supporting his argument versus opposing it. It seems like you're saying the local politicians try something. People revolt. The locals politicians get the EU to shove it down the people's throats and all is good. Isn't the EU shoving it down the people's throats what the person was arguing?

Comment Re:No, you're not crazy (Score 1) 441

I'm still trying to figure out what my comment about Joan -- white Joan -- had anything to do with Kelly. Yes, I walked on egg shells around Kelly from then on.

If you're so ill educated as to not know what "integration" means with regards to race, and so blitheringly stupid as to not be able to Google it... you should walk on egg shells around Kathy - so as not to be a future cause of problems.

You're right. I guess I wasn't enough of a racist to look at her skin and realize I need to treat black women differently from white people. Thanks for the education.

Comment Re:No, you're not crazy (Score 1) 441

So is this how it works? I come up with an anecdote, unverifiable of course, about what a racist douchebag someone as a counter-argument?

I was responding to someone else having to walk on eggshells -- so it was still on topic.

Just because some (possibly ficticious) people are morons does not invalidate the argument.

So, someone writes a blog about some (possible ficiticious [sic]) people are morons and that's supposed to create a sound argument?

Comment Re:No, you're not crazy (Score 4, Interesting) 441

And she wonders why she feels like people walk on eggshells around her and why she feels like she makes people uncomfortable.

Our group brought a white woman (race only matters based on what comes later), let's call her Joan. Joan had a closed door office downstairs from the group. Once she joined the group, we had her move into cube-land with the rest of us.

Enter Joan's friend, let's call her Kelly. Kelly happens to be black. One day Joan, Kelly, and I were having lunch in the break room. Kelly asked Joan why she moved out of her nice, closed-door office into cube-land. Here's where I step in it. I replied "We wanted to integrate Joan into the group." Kelly goes absolutely berserk on me. "What do you mean integrate?!? I'm integrated!!"

I'm still trying to figure out what my comment about Joan -- white Joan -- had anything to do with Kelly. Yes, I walked on egg shells around Kelly from then on.

Slashdot Top Deals

Work is the crab grass in the lawn of life. -- Schulz

Working...